I'm going to probably get flamed for this (especially cause of low post count), but I actually liked it. I think you guys are expecting too much from it. A good survival show probably wouldn't last more than a couple of episodes. The great-unwashed masses just wouldn't except it.

"Lost" has the potential of being a really fun show, IMHO. 'Course I like zombie movies too <img src="/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />. The second episode does seem to indicate that some organization has been doing experiments on the island, so who knows what they might find. I see this as more of a Buffy/Angel type show with a survival twist, as opposed to a pure survival show. I think they'll probably through in some survival tidbits here and there. As long as they don't get it too terribly wrong, I won&#8217;t complain. Remember that this is a TV show on one of the Big Three. Don't expect too much.

ki4buc, I had a totally different take on the black box thing. Too me it seems that they have been setting up that character as the totally useless bit of fluff. IMO, the fact that she thought a black box sends out a distress signal, was just another way of showing us that she really isn't all that connected to reality. Of course, I could be worn and you could be right about the writers just being incompetent.

Leo

who doesnt like those? those are some of the best horror themed monsters IMO.

if lost just added SOME real useful survival info or situations i dont think it would be mocked as much as it was.

>>if lost just added SOME real useful survival info or situations i dont think it would be mocked as much as it was.<<

Exactly. "Cast Away" was lame in many respects (in 4 years he accomplished... what?), but at least it pretty realistically portrayed the fears of the first nights, and how hard it was to create fire....

I'm just embarrassed to admit that I've watched "Lost" twice now...

I missed the first episode... but I was mainly wanting to see some of my favorite no name actors (Daniel dae Kim, Terry O'Quinn, etc) do their stuff... and I almost gasped outloud when I caught the episode on oct 6th... Terry O'Quinn was playing Locke... which is good, he's good with "Millenium" type characters.

But it was the Title of the Third epsiode, "Tabula Rasa" that caught me off guard, and instantly makes me want to check out the series in depth....

First, Tabula rasa, or "blank slate", is the basic idea that individual human beings are born "blank" (with no built-in mental content), and that his or her identity is defined overwhelmingly by events after birth. However, there are two meanings of the term in modern usage, and these meanings are fundamentally incongruent.

Now, The character, Locke... seems to be a direct refrence to John Locke (August 29, 1632 - October 28, 1704), who was an Enlightenment philosopher. The character in Lost seemingly has a knowledge about the island ("evil") inhabitants... which we'll get to see invade the camp in the upcoming episodes...

Now, this gets a bit preachy.... but...

As understood by Locke, tabula rasa meant that the mind of the individual was born "blank", and it also emphasized the individual's freedom to author his own soul. Each individual was free to define the content of his character -- but his basic identity as a member of the human species cannot be so altered. It is this presumption of a free, self-authored mind combined with an immutable human nature, from which the Lockean doctrine of "natural" rights derives.

The modern definition of tabula rasa, however, is fundamentally altered from the Lockean meaning. While the idea that the individual can be changed remains, the power to effect that change is now ascribed to society, not the self -- and that power extends to the whole of human nature. Under this view, one can shape the individual with few, if any, restrictions by changing the individual's environment, and thus sensory experiences. In this form, the theory is taken up by many utopian schemes that rely on changing human nature in order to achieve their goals. As the Lockean idea of "natural rights" no longer holds any meaning under such a view (because "natural" now means whatever society chooses to define), many such schemes end up moving towards one form or another of totalitarianism.

So what does all this mean? A couple of things. IF you're into character driven stories, this is it. You get to see just where humanity begins and ends, and what societies without law can do.

Second... I bet you anything Locke's connection to the island will become fuel for the already character driven fire.

Forget all this "The plan crash wasn't accurate" crap, thats just a back drop. These creatures are going to change a few peoples opinions.... and I bet you it's not dinosaurs.

(Side Note: Check out the last ten seconds of "Deep Rising" for an interesting connection to "Lost")

You're right... I've decided it's not dinosaurs at all, but the large monster we never see is a manifestation of the group's collective unconscious "survivor guilt", which is of course an obvious homage to "Forbidden Planet", itself based on Shakespeare's "The Tempest", with it's allegory of the awakening of the long-suppressed parts of human spirit in the late renaissance, and the relationship of that awakening to the opening of the New World.

Just kidding.

I may be wrong, but my first reaction is that you're really stretching to find deep intrinsic significance in a screenplay that may have none at all.

But then, I didn't watch the latest episode. Perhaps I simply missed the deep significance because it happened in almost the last place one would expect.... that is, on TV.

I might be stretching... but if it wasn't intentional.... it's quite the coincidence.... <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Maybe... maybe I'm just being cynical. On the other hand, being "faked out" by TV plots for a few decades can do that to you.

But I'm not saying it's coincidence...

The object of the game is to get you to tune in, and hopefully sit through the (now almost endless) commercials (and now the increasingly-obnoxious, dancing, noisy logos that interrupt your enjoyment of the show but don't count against their commercial break time). If being "intrigued" by vague allusions accomplishes that, great. The longer they can string the audience along wondering what's going on, the better. There doesn't have to be any substance behind it. There's no particular reason for them to have any "payoff" at the end of the episode, the season, or the series, because at that point they've accomplished their goal.

I watched the first three episodes again, several times. All these nay sayers must have been tuned outeven before the first episode, because they just don't seem to be backing anything up with much of anything.

While not everything is explained (if it was, it would be better off a miniseries not a weekly show), it does set everything up in such a way that makes JJ Abrams look brilliant.

Someone addressed the issue of the plane crash looking fake without realism... I called a few people talked to some others and checked with other boards; It's morte plausable than people think; theres TWO important factors everyone seems to leave out...

1) you can never fully predict what happens in any given crash. while there are some simple "predictable" physics involved (ie; plane falls apart, plane will go down), you can't possibly figure it out.

2) Theres a STORNG indication that the air "event", the decent, and the crash MAY have a supernatural or "controled" aspect to it. In the words of my friend, "Perhaps the island has a defense to it... it clearly has a dead zone to it".

Which makes sense. Obviously, if they took the dinosaurs route, it would get old fast - and the polar bear indicated there was a sort of natural "but unatural" element to it.

Of course, everything will be explained as the season(s) progress, but if it is a "Splicing colony", I'll scream.

Locke, of course, will reveail a bit too much in episode 4.

>>2) Theres a STORNG indication that the air "event", the decent, and the crash MAY have a supernatural or "controled" aspect to it.<<

Ok, that may be where we have a disconnect. At that point, I'm afriad I sort of lose interest. Not trying to dictate anyone else's interest, if you're into that, fine, but I sort of thought I would be seeing something about survival, not LOTR.

That's pretty much the same reason I started to get off the bus as soon as the "mysterious" BIG THING tromped down some trees. Whatever it turns out to be, it really seems that putting it on a South Pacific island is going to involve a real stretch. Same with the polar bear. Regardless of what turns the plot takes, when you've just shot a polar bear on a tropical island, you're no longer discussing realistic survival scenarios. When it becomes fantasy, as it seemed to pretty early, I personally lose interest.

>>Of course, everything will be explained as the season(s) progress<<

Actually, contradicting that was sort of my point in my last post on the subject. Maybe, but... I'd be willing to bet at least a few bucks that several of the most significant "unexplained" points will remain unexplained, probably until the series is cancelled. There's just no compelling reason for the writers to resolve much of anything so long as the audience is still stringing along hoping they will in the next episode.

Since I don't really intend to watch it anymore myself, I don't expect to comment on it further. I'll be interested to read here whether anything really gets resolved.

The black box reference was to show how the girl was - scared but repressing reality.

Finally saw the show and did not exactly like, but did not exactly dislike it. Kinda like potato chip programming.

Rena